Skip to main content

About your Search

20121128
20121206
STATION
MSNBCW 16
CNNW 5
CSPAN2 4
CSPAN 3
KQED (PBS) 2
FBC 1
KCSM (PBS) 1
KGO (ABC) 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
LANGUAGE
English 49
Search Results 0 to 48 of about 49 (some duplicates have been removed)
's right. joe lieberman is conservative, a hawk, respected by some senators on foreign policy issues. there may be three republican senators who don't like her, another 97 who have votes, the house members who have been campaigning against her don't have votes. something chip said, it would be weird or odd for this process to be playing out if she is not going to be nominated as secretary of state. chip, it shows i think a real political premise on your part, and i think unfortunately shared by so much of your party here, she's a cabinet-level foreign policy person. so if you're serious about any of these issues, it shouldn't matter whether she's nominated or not. you should care about the substance of it. secondly, you and your party come to this debate with big deficit because you and president bush and dick cheney lied this country into war and you had a lot of lies on foreign policy about wmds. president bush even said once in may 2003 that we found the wmds in iraq. dick cheney and condoleezza rice talked about links to al qaeda in iraq. you've never made up for those huge, seri
the nature of the obama administration foreign policy is, paul. and susan rice in some ways encapsulates a strain in democratic policy thinking that goes way back, a story that's actually told by samantha power, a close aide to president obama and wrote about genocide in with a randa. and susan rice is state department that makes a cameo appearance in the book, quoted asking, if we call what happened in rwanda genocide, how does it play for us in what were then the mid term elections of 1994. well, there's a pattern here as we see. one is a reluctance to have america be engaged in certain issues, and the second one is politicizing foreign policy issues because they might hurt the president's political stance. >> paul: and you want a secretary of state, if you're-- well, the american people want a secretary of state who is some more independent judgment and not thinking so much about the politics, is that the point? >> that would be one thing that you would look for in the secretary of state. >> paul: sorry for stating the obvious. >> the national interests and not the president's mid ter
to you want to close? [laughter] >> let me go back to susan rice did in terms of our foreign policy, everybody agrees that hillary clinton has done a fine job -- almost everybody, i guess. >> what exactly has she done right? >> in terms of making policy -- >> you don't think she was that good? >> i think she was a nice presents but i don't see her fingerprints -- >> if you ask me what and we kissinger did, i can tell you. what did she do? >> do we have a dissenting point of view? >> she did a huge number of things, she quieted down more near catastrophes that you can imagine -- >> name on. >> may ii finish? she has done an enormous amount for women. most people did not have the rights that i do on this program to hit you upside the head when i think we're wrong, charles. that would get me killed most places. >> if that is your case, i rest my. >> i think the foreign policy of president obama and secretary clinton has been successful. i take it is hard to argue with that. i think that hillary clinton as the engineer, if not architect of a good part of that, and the turn to it a shot
.s. foreign policy in the middle east in question at this hour. violence spiring out of control in syria after 20 months of civil unrest and the deaths of at least 40,000 murdered civilians at the hands of their own government. united states and nato agreeing to deploy patriot weapons and to thwart an aso-called by assad. the missile systems to be positioned near the syria. his staff denies that and estimates if they were deploy troops, it requires 75,000 of the troops in a full ground invasion in order to seize the chemical weapon stockpile. fox news confirming they were not ordered to draft the consideration of such a mission. secretary of state clinton is nonetheless talking very tough calling for assad to step down as the obama administration has done for the past 15 months, but refusing, still, to detail which consequences those would be. >> we will explore with like-minded countries what more we can do to bring the conflict to an end, but that will require the assad regime making the decision to participate in a political transition, ending the violence against its own people, and we hop
'll be talking foreign policy with national security adviser dr. brzezinski. keep it right here on "morning joe." music is a universal language. but when i was in an accident... i was worried the health care system spoke a language all its own with unitedhealthcare, i got help that fit my life. information on my phone. connection to doctors who get where i'm from. and tools to estimate what my care may cost. so i never missed a beat. we're more than 78,000 people looking out for more than 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. time for citi price rewind. because your daughter really wants that pink castle thing. and you really don't want to pay more than you have to. only citi price rewind automatically searches for the lowest price. and if it finds one, you get refunded the difference. just use your citi card and register your purchase online. have a super sparkly day! ok. [ male announcer ] now all you need is a magic carriage. citi price rewind. start saving at citi.com/pricerewind. bp has paid overthe people of bp twenty-threeitment to the gulf. billion dollars to
foreign policy views. gwen: and he was close to chris stevens, the ambassador. >> i think there's a lot of personal feelings there. gwen: how much of it is about what the u.n. ambassador said on a talk show and how much of this is about what the intelligence department didn't do and what the state department didn't do? >> you're 100% right. i mean, i talked to republicans this week about this, and foreign policy expert republicans, who say why are we picking this fight? what we need to be asking is did the intelligence community decide to use the different language because they were playing politics, or did they not know? we've heard that general petraeus said that he immediately assumed that this was a terror attack from al qaeda. so the question is this republican said to me, why are we making this about her? this needs to be about something bigger that is actually bigger than susan rice. did we get it wrong? did we pay no attention to it because there was an election? i mean, those are very important issues that of course -- >> and didn't it feed those suspicions when after they had
spoke thursday about the future of u.s. foreign policy. the syrian civil war, and other challenges facing the middle east. this came at a forum hosted by "foreign-policy" magazine. she also answer questions. this is an hour. [applause] >> madam secretary, today we solve all your problems. nothing left to worry about, really. actually, the office of policy planning and the foreign policy group made a bet we could bring together leaders from inside government from leaders outside government to have a real discussion about the future of american foreign policy. is there to say based on the conversation we had today that that has paid off. that is especially thanks to say paanalysts and participants to mid really impressive than insightful interventions over the course of the day. i also want to give a special thank you to people at the foreign-policy group and policy planning office, who were the heart and soul of putting today together. if you've given a quick round of applause. -- you could give them a quick round of applause. [applause] we made a second bet that david could shine a
the senate. are you open to being in a foreign policy team or in the obama cabinet? are you being vetted? >> no, i'm completely unvetted at this time. so, no, that's not my plan. look, i always say that -- i really feel this -- anytime a president calls anybody, and i'm saying it for myself to serve our country, any president, that you've got to give it serious consideration, particularly i've spent my life in public service. but that's not my plan. and i'm not waiting by the telephone. >> i wanted to ask you about the palestinian vote because the u.n. vote today is overwhelmingly in favor of nonmember status at general assembly for the palestinians. they've been told by the u.s. repeatedly this is a step backwards but their argument they've been waiting for 20 years or long somewhere that the negotiations are going nowhere. what is your take on this, because chuck schumer is talking about a defense appropriations amendment which would take money away from the west bank if they proceed. >> yeah, i mean the vote in the united nations, i would say, is not surprising but still disappointing
, vice president of foreign policy at brookings, coconvenienter of the forum on u.s./israel relations convening this week. thanks very much. what is the significance of what happened at the u.n.? a step forward, a step back or status quo? >> i guess a step sideways, out of the normal channel for resolving the conflict peacefully, that is through negotiati negotiations, sideways to the united nations. it doesn't move the palestinians forward. it's a significant but symbolic act. and if it produces a kind of punitive, vicious circle in which the israelis now announce more settlement activity, the particularly strategic activity it seems to be, and then the palestinians decide to go to the international criminal court who would charge israel with some crimes and then we'll get into a downward spiral, the congress cuts the funds to the palestinian authority, we could be in very negative territory quite quickly and bear in mind that there's an election coming up in israel in which an outbidding process is likely to occur. already you have lieberman calling for the toppling of abu mazen and
, the foreign policy team. >> we saw this joking moment, let me replay it, a news conference to push the u.n. treaty on disabilities which -- >> which is going to -- may fail. >> which is unbelievable since america has been -- >> very surprising. >> way out front since the days of bush '41 and tom harken was the big -- >> bob dole. >> and john mccain today made a plea for bob dole who is in walter reed he wants to see this great moment, a worldwide standard, it would be good for business, but as you pointed out on the daily rundown today, the chamber of commerce supports this, selling wheelchairs -- >> around the world. >> and here, it's stalemate. it needs two-thirds, more than 60. this is a treaty. because it has u.n. attached to it -- >> going to say it's brand, it's about brand. >> at that moment with mccain and john kerry because of foreign relations issue and this is the way mccain sort of gigged john kerry and kerry teased him back. >> thank you very much, mr. secretary. >> thank you very much, mr. president. >> and there was a lot of joking after that. a lot of laughing. >> we shou
of the old foreign policy guard, versus this new foreign policy guard and some led by jon kyl who is not an isolationist, if you will. there is some isolationist views there but it's an interesting divide sitting in the senate. >> it's not even a divide anymore. some aren't part of the caucus anymore. with this issue, part of it is to say that there's skepticism, overall skepticism of the u.n. among some of the republican party, which is probably an understatement. this digs deeper into that deep rooted skepticism of the body in general. >> all right. i want to move to fiscal cliff here. there's a mix of public opinion and public policy here. democrats feel as if they're winning the public opinion war but that isn't going to get them 218 votes. so at what point does winning the public opinion sort of become diminishing returns? >> well, i don't think it comes to diminishing returns. you see consistently that the exit polls show that people -- not just support president obama but support seeing the wealthy pay a little bit more on taxes, half of the electorate said that. everybody
basis on which to determine british policy on this though? when the foreign secretary understands statehood is not a gift to be given, but a right to be acknowledged. i won the foreign secretary of the united kingdom abstains tomorrow, it will not be a measure of our growing influence. it would be a confirmation of our growing irrelevance to meaningful engagement in the search for peace across europe to meaningful engagement in the search for peace across europe to meaningful engagement in the search for peace across europe i believe will be the search for peace across europe i believe will be an overwhelming majority of 102 members of the general assembly voting for enhanced observer status for palestinians. that can and must send a signal to the palestinians that diplomatic effort in the path of politics or not the path of pockets of violence to his two state solution. let's be honest, in recent days, hamas in the midst of the conflict with israel welcome the secretary general, prime minister v-chip comforter set turkey, iraq, jordan come the pulse to any authority, saudi arabia
-- there was like -- there is a lack of talk i guess as far as obama's -- foreign policies also. so i just want to -- i want to see what you say about that, too. >> stephanie: i'm sorry. about his foreign policy? >> yeah. about his foreign policies. there's no real path that i see by that. where they -- where they're going with that, i guess. okay. that's a little doughy. he was spitballing a term paper. somehow the fiscal cliff got in the foreign policy. here is monday morning. it is all right. >> yeah, we just flush the lines with that one. >> stephanie: sure. a little telephone call and blow. >> yeah. >> is there something happening we should have a policy for that. >> said he was a college student so my guess is that if he's up this early he's probably still up from last night. >> stephanie: he's been up all night. things are a little doughy in there. that's okay. it is like jim -- >> give him 30 minutes. >> stephanie: last-minute ideas. curious your thoughts on -- >> stuff that happened -- [ ♪ "jeopardy
will understand that we cannot discern in our foreign policy our prior opinions. there are a number of issues on which we do not agree, on a conclusion that would be reached. >> mr. speaker, given the distinct history of our country and the legacy left behind in the region, does the foreign secretary agree that we have a unique ability to show leadership and courage for the palestinians and israelis who want peace. and surely, this can be one way to signal that leadership. i ask them to think again. >> we have a unique responsibility and we do not have the same power as in the 1940s, although we do have it in a new and different form. we have a great responsibility as a member of the u.n. u.n. security council. but the problem is giving hope to palestinians and israelis, that is a very important point that she made. it is important that we do that and give hope to people on both sides of that divide. and that is what i am seeking to do today. >> recognizing this position to an extent, but i'm sorry to say i think there are a lot of fundamentals -- [inaudible] given that countries around the w
we sort of to set politics and issues aside. she bring as 21st century approach to foreign policy. one that is in step with president obama. she also has a great deal of passion for human rights and human dignity. what john kerry has passion for nobody is really sure. he is kind of a vanilla buy. she understands issues of poverty and pandemic and how though pray into national security and foreign policy. jon: on the other hand, senator mccain says, john kerry came within a whisker of being president of the united states, angela. senator mccain went on to say this, i would love to hear him make necessary case. i don't have anything in thinks background like the tragedy in gaziano that would make me carefully examine the situation. >> it is doing susan rice. if kerry is the nominee he would have smooth sailing through. in washington these are friends behind the scenes. if susan rice is nominee we'll have partisan politics. we have the liberal mainstream media already bashing republicans, some calling them racists and sexist in the fact they won't support susan rise because the fact
's a problem with the photo op foreign policy with few real accomplishments and it's becoming more apparent to people around the world. >> gregg: we also supply aid to the palestinians, humanitarian aid. should that be reconsidered most recent actions against israel? >> with any aid you have to ask what it is doing, what goal is it advancing? we keep harping on both parties but seemingly hard the other israelis that we need to come to some sort of negotiation, get to the table have an agreement, petition agreement. i think we need to step back and realize the political factors in place for an agreement. if you have gaza run by hamas, starting wars with israel whenever you turn your back it's not going to lead to an agreement. we should be focusing on money and state on changing those political factors rather than writing these checks left and right. >> gregg: how do we can changes those political factors and what is the possibility in the near or distant future there could be a reconciliation and on the other hand gaza the palestinians there controlled by what is essentially a terrorist gro
nation that enacted democratic refo freed the most famous dissident it marked unambiguous foreign policy triumph for mr. obama and his secretary of state. the most well traveled in modern times. >> i could not be more grateful, not only for your service, hillary, but also for the powerful message that you send. >> but the obama administration no less than its preds so sors has been thoroughly vexed by the middle east, with the syrian regime quashing a two-year uprising that killed more than 30,000 people. where iran despite tough sanctions on the energy sector marches toward a nuclear weapons capability. and where the arab-israeli conflict festers, despite lofty talk from washington early on. >> today you will see an example of the kind of robust diplomacy that the president intends to pursue. >> clinton helped broker this month's truce between hamas and israel but ties with jerusalem frayed since 2009 and other danger spots such as north korea are no less dangerous than they were four years ago. >> she has a small legacy with burma, a positive. but she has a legacy with libya which is a
come together. on foreign policy issues, we shouldn't be playing politics. >> let me ask you, senator, if we can, let's go to the bottom line. can they block her? can she be can confirmed? >> the confirmation process is a very serious process t involves hearings and she should be judged on her record and what comes out at the hearings. i think so many senators have already prejudged her on information that i don't think is relevant to her capability to be secretary of state or whatever confirmation appointment that the president were to make. i would hope that the senators would withhold, allow the process to go forward. i think she has an outstanding record to present to the american people. >> are you willing to fight for that record? are democrats ready to dig in and fight if the president chooses to nominate ambassador rice? >> we want president obama's team in place as soon as possible. he won the election. we believe his team is entitled to the courtesy of the united states senate. there should be a processed and she should be judged on her record. >> senator ben cardin, thank y
in the senate really has been his work in foreign relations, and in the area of foreign policy. i think the senate would be losing a giant in that record. i don't know how that directly impacts the state of massachusetts, but certainly it certainly is never good to lose a senator with that much seniority. >> what about senator patrick of massachusetts. what would happen here? he's got two years left in his term. he could run for senate if he left, i don't know if he'd have to step down, or he might even leave to go to a cabinet post. do you think scott brown might run for governor? >> i think he would be better advised to run for governor. now there's also talk and this being massachusetts where the democrats run everything and there are about 11 republicans left to complain, there's talk that they might 15 finagle the rules again that he's not old school democratic enough to do that. there was rumblings in the boston her and would that said that there was some talk on beacon hill that the democrats the legislature might go back to the old system that they changed so that mitt romney wo
in his foreign policy. >> ari, what's the talk in massachusetts about a possible senate race of john kerry because there's still speculation he might go to defense if he didn't go to state. >> theol
confidence in her and if he chooses to go with her, it will be continuity in his foreign policy. >> ari, what's the talk in massachusetts about a possible senate race of john kerry because there's still speculation he might go to defense if he didn't go to state. >> the folks i know who work for john kerry are much more focused on the fit for the state department because that is of course what he oversees on his committee.
, the person he thinks will best help him shape and project this country's foreign policy. just as important, the senate has the duty to advise and consent to his decision. if senators see a serious problem with a nominee, they have a right and duty to speak and vote that way. someone keeps telling the press that president obama prefers to nominate u.n. ambassador susan rice, and as long as that person is not the president and does so under ground rules that protect his or her identity, we are condemned to this preventative war we're watching in washington. one side attacking while no one outside the gates of the white house knows what the president intends. i take president obama at his official word. he has not decided whose name to send to the senate, and with that we go to the first of our two senatorial guests, senator bob corker, republican of tennessee. senator corker, i have laid it out as best i can. you senators have a right and a duty to decide, to advise and consent or not to a president's nominee. isn't this strange that we're having the debate about the qualifications for a can
on this, she will eventually be forced to relent. she does not have the experience on foreign policy. host: in this wall street journal era, it says the administration may have erred. there are different ways of treating the politics on doing that. you could argue that going in preemptively was a better course in some respects. the idea of a susan rice nomination is still something of a trial balloon, because the president has not said definitively that he wants to make her secretary of state. so this was sort of testing period to see if she could survive. at the same time, no one in the white house has denied that she is his favorite candidate. it could have gone on either way, frankly, yesterday, or at some point after he had already nominated her. host: newspapers are reporting susan rice will be meeting with susan collins of maine and senator bob corker of tennessee, who is in line to be the ranking republican on the senate foreign relations committee, which will hold confirmation hearings for secretary of state nominees. these three republicans would need more republicans to come to t
a long background of dealing in foreign policy issues. but she's also somebody who hasn't been willing to answer some of the hard questions that many of my colleagues have had regarding the situation in benghazi. and i think that demonstrates questions about her judgment and how she would be -- how independent she would be as secretary of state. that's obviously something very important in a secretary of state. >> let's talk about the fiscal cliff. the president and other folks are hoping for a deal by christmas. is it doable? >> i hope so. i think there's at least in my view an opportunity here for us to do something that's really good for the country. but it has to be -- it's got to be entitlement reform included in anything that we ultimately act on. we believe that in order to solve the country's fiscal solvency issues into the future, you've got to deal with the issue of entitlement reform. that's something so far the president has been reluctant to put on the table. so far what we've gotten out of him is this proposal to raise taxes which we think would be harmful to the economy.
's exactly what ari was saying which is the president is asking who is most in sync with my foreign policy? ambassador rice is someone who helped form late the obama foreign policy. i think senator kerry would too. democrats are now in a position where we have an embarrassment of riches. i really hope they don't start worrying about this or that political matter. in democrats can't win elections in massachusetts, there's something fundamentally wrong with what we're doing. >> he did win the last time, scott brown. not this time but the time before he won in massachusetts. we got to leave it there. paul, ari, guys thank you. the search is now on the for the country's latest multimillionaire. in the next hour we'll have the latest on where the winning tickets in the power ballot ri were sold. and coming up next, accusations a u.s. ally is now helping iran cheat on international economic sanctions by helping sell its oil for gold. [ male announcer ] when this hotel added aflac to provide a better benefits package... oahhh! [ male announcer ] it made a big splash with the employees. [ duck yel
a radio interview and he expounded on some interesting theories about the president's foreign policy. take a listen. >> the only way you can explain the horrendous decisions that were so completely wrong-headed would be if this administration had a bunch of muslim brotherhood members giving them advice. >> so, bob, it's pretty clear the president has lots of people in the muslim brotherhood working for him like all thots those guys that killed osama bin laden and what about those who command the drone strikes? >> that whack job with texas is the person who went after the woman who works for hillary clinton. this is the kind of conspiracy mongering you would hope was over after this election. instead, it may get worse. and it may take two or three presidential thumpings for the republican party to come to terms with the fact that it can't be anti-immigrant, can't come across as anti-women, and it's never going to get the vote of young voters as long as it's anti-gay. these are hard questions. bill clinton, and matt is right about this, bill clinton brought the democratic party -- it wasn't
are no ending the wars for budget purposes but because of the foreign policy decision, the wars were not going to be fought and you are not really saving money, it is a budget gimmick, money -- >> no, it is not, when republicans propose it is a budget gimmick. >> chris: sure, absolutely. >> address it with them. >> chris: well, i'm addressing it with you. >> again, it is a basic challenge we face, chris, the challenge we face, which is how to bring the deficit down over time, now, it will require spending savings, it will require increasing in rates of revenues and we think we can do it and will work hard to do it and have a good chance to do it and no reason we can't. >> chris: last question, can you promise that we will not go over the cliff. >> no, i can't promise that. that is a decision that lies in the hands of the republicans, that are now opposing increases in tax rates, if they recognize the reality, that we cannot afford to extend the tax rates we have the basis for an agreement that would be good for the american people. >> chris: and the president bears no responsibility, it is all
foreign policy. what do all three of them have in common in they'll get tea party challenges in 2014. and you know, i read the speeches that rubio and paul ryan gave tonight and they were wonderful about the need to reex out to the poor and the afflicted. and so on. but every republican who votes for any kind of revenue increase in these coming, in these coming votes, there will be facing a tea party challenge. and i suspect that that party is going to have to come to terms with that. it may take a couple more cycles to do it. >>> have the tea party challenge would not even let these guys loose to vote for the american disabilities act going worldwide. >> outrageous. it is just, it is beyond outrageous. it is the kind of crazy nut behavior that lost in this election. mitt romney might have been a more successful candidate if he had stood up to the tea party at any one point during the election. he was never outflanked to his right during the course of winning that nomination. and i think that republicans are going to have to ask themselves. especially those who want to be president.
ridiculed hillary clinton's foreign policy experience and called john mccain reckless and confused. if the president does nominate her, those who know susan rice well say she's more than up for the fight, and although it would be a bruising confirmation battle, she almost certainly would have the votes to be confirmed. jonathan karl, abc news, washington. >>> interesting parallel that story points out between condoleezza, confirmation process, and this one. "the washington post," interesting profile, i like the human nuggets they find. as u.n. ambassador she gained a reputation for sharp intellect. and sharp elbows. she is not known for diplomatic finesse, known for being aggressive sometimes too aggressive and using salty language on occasion. in private she has a good sense of humor. trying to dig up some humanity on her as well, but clearly she's a bulldog behind closed doors. >> they wouldn't indicate whether or not they would block the nomination if it gets to the point. the president has not nominated her to this point, we just want to make that clear. but some of the beef th
's foreign policy and seldom the case a achievement or error by one of them endures forever. analysts say secretary clinton brought undeniable star power to her role as chief diplomat and used her unique status on the world stage and global rolodex to advance issues of concern to her. she is included gender equality, the environment, technology and social media and steering of resources to her department. yet on the great foreign policy challenge of her time clinton can point to only limited progress of kind could be expected in the post 9/11 world where tough sanctions on iran's oil and gas sector failed to check that regime's march towards nuclear weapon. where change in leadership in north korea produced know change in that rogue state's behavior and upheaval's of the arab spring hardly dampened the volatility of the middle east. one analyst who worked for six secretaries of state told fox news, hillary clinton will not enter the secretary of states hall of fame, he argues, her boss kept mrs. clinton on a short leash. >> issues regarding peace, war, iraq being afghanistan, war against
, the administration chose that particular foreign policy leader to go on sunday shows as opposed to other folks in the administration. my hunch is -- this is really just my guess. it isn't something i've coordinated. >> no talking points with the intelligence? >> no talking points. my view of it is that this was obviously a terrible incident where americans were killed. and there was clear sort of lack of full coordination and communication between elements of the executive branch. and they made a choice to have her be the sort of face forward for the administration on responding to questions about what had happened and why and when and where. i would be joining calls for an investigation and a joint committee and so forth if the administration were stonewalling and saying we won't be accountable for this. we won't tell you what happened. we won't get into the background. that's not been my experience. the senate foreign relations committee on which i serve unanimously sent a letter to the administration asking that we be briefe
.s. troops on the ground. they wanted minimal arms to defend themselves and we outsourced our foreign policy to fundamentalist regimes and they supported the fundamentalists. there is one other issue. the nato air defense patriot batteries going to turkey to defend turkish air space and send a message to assad. that an inside baseball nato issue. and i wouldn't confuse that with giving arms to the syrian rebels. megyn: is there any way of establishing a safe haven any want the viewers to know syria seems so far away it seems like there is a bad guy running it and folks trying to exploit the situation. but the reports are some of these assad forces were going door to door, lining up entire families, shooting little kids in the head in front of their parent and shooting the parent in front of the children. lining them up one by one and watching them kill the families right in front of them. it's so gruesome and vial. is there anything we can do in terms of establishing a safe haven or something for people to get to? >> certainly there are de facto safe havens across the turkish and jordanian f
that he has on foreign policy in the republican senate caucus? mika and i talked to so many people over the past two, three years that say we want, republican senators, we want out of afghanistan but, you know what, we just sort of stay out of john's way. how many times have we heard that? >> a lot. it's disturbing. >> we hear it all the time. they stay out of his way. are they going to blindly follow and, again, i love and respect senator mccain, but i don't want my party to blindly follow him over a cliff on this battle especially if it's a personal one. >> well, on this battle it may be a personal one. i think the answer to your broader question is that republicans will continue to respect and follow his advice and syria is the next big issue that he is pounding away on. he was at a forum at the museum yesterday and crying out for american leadership on syria which means more engagement, more involvement. so there are a lot of big issues that he has huge influence on because of his experiences, his personal history. this issue i'm not so sure they'll follow him on. two of the three s
article in foreign policy recently. has been was a china adviser to mitt romney. he now heads the university of chicago. but he basically wrote about the sort of two chinas or to the ages. he said there's sort of a doctor jekyll and mr. hide that's evolving to a doctor jekyll, which is the nicer of the two is the economic issue. the dr. height is the strategic asia, is the security agent. if you look at the economic asia there's heavy amounts of interdependence, everybody is investigating each other. $19 billion in regional trade which includes india. if you look at the security asia, national entity, orders dispute, historical grievances just are driving things apart and you're seeing real impact on these. in the has its own problems in the region across china region across china. region across chandigarh on the border dispute. if you look at this is something that you want to be deeply engaged in or do you look at this is basically something that you can ride along and freeload and let america and canada and japan handled? >> steve, your question -- >> i'm and freeload, by t
things. they don't believe in the same way to prosperity. they don't believe in the same way in foreign policy. they can agree that they love america. we do know, in fact, that there has been some democratic interest in one governor romney's ideas, which was to put a cap on deductions. just say, okay, you can only take, you know, this much of your income, that kind of thing. can i see that there might be a discussion about that, but the specifics are not going to be dealt with between mitt romney and president obama. that ship sailed. this has to do with the president and basically the republicans on the house side, so i see this more as a photo op. i guess we're fwog get a still picture and a read-out about their nice, cordal meeting. i'm not saying nothing could happen. i just think it's hard to figure what it would be. there's ain't lot of love between them here. they have to make nice. how do they begin, do you think, to work in the same direction, to kind of put that aside? how much of this relationship really needs repairing? >> i don't know that either one of them feel it needs r
. but as it relates to foreign policy, what would you say is our greatest challenge to move forward that no one is talking about? >> well, so what did the two most important people in this country sit down and talk about yesterday at lunch? when everything else is done and the election is wrapped up, it isn't about social issues. it isn't about the fringe issues. they sat down together and talked about america's leadership in the world. so at the end of the day, that's what matters most to republicans and to democrats. how do you get to where we need to be? it's going to be about economics. it's going to be about education. it's going to be about rounding out tax policies that serve our free market economy. and we're not there yet. but it was interesting when i read, you know, the news coming out of yesterday's lunch. at the end of the day, what is it we care most about? republicans, democrats, sit down and break bread. >> two things. first, ambassador, this idea that the corporations control our government destroys our democracy. and that's something i think republicans have to -- the progress
their digital director. dan who was their foreign policy advisor, beth meyers. >> bill: you have all of the major players there. what did you learn from the romney campaign? >> just so many nuggets came out of it. when we talked about what happened with clint eastwood, stuart says personally, die think it was a big deal. he goes up to clint eastwood beforehand saying you're going to be talking about the same little speech you gave at two fund-raisers, aren't you? and eastwood -- he looked at him and just said yep and then he goes out and does the empty chair thing. but while that dominated the news of the night and it was part of the their at this of that convention, they didn't think it was determinative. >> bill: they're still in denial. >> the other thing that was interesting is on the selection of paul ryan. so the democrats this we kind of knew. actually, i know from another forum that david axelrod was at the university of chicago institute of politics. he talked about how he thought all along it would be eit
life-saving assistance, whether they support children, strengthen food security or advance u.s. foreign policy. we also consider operational issues including efficient management and oversight. this case by case analysis ensures that there is careful consideration of the context surrounding a proposed activity. before the coup, usaid was the largest donor supporting leches in mali. programs trained poll workers and improved elections monitoring systems, strengthened political parties and provided voter education. when the electoral support activities resumed, providing the consent of congress, it will help support free an fair elections in mali and a peaceful political exit from the current situation. a key issue will be ensuring the inclusion and participation of the internally displaced personals and refugees in the political process. we plan to expand our elections assistance programming to include broader civic engagement activities, to support national reconciliation as part of the return to an inclusive democratic maliian society. the only usaid supported economic growth activitie
do anything other than a spectacular job. but i'm a political guy, not a foreign policy guy. i'm just unable to really render a very knowledgeable -- >> let me rephrase the question. politically speaking, who would the president be better off nominating? >> politically speaking? probably ambassador rice because she would represent sort of new and different administration. but i don't think people when they look at the secretary of state, i don't think that there's much of a political gain there. i say that, but i say it without a lot of conviction or a lot of authority. i think the one that you want is the one that does the best job because if they get in there and do something wrong, the politics of it are horrendous for you. i'm just not that -- that's not my area of expertise. >> mary, what's your thought? >> he cannot nominate susan rice and not because of the benghazi scandal but because of her previous tenure at state where she doesn't have a good record and her u.n. record is not good. we don't have time to go through the particulars, but i think senator kerry would not only be
add together administration's problem is a the president tries to assemble a foreign policy team for his second term. savannah. >> andrea mitchell in washington, thank you. >>> let's turn to chris matthews, host of msnbc's "hardball," chris, good morning to you. >> good morning, savannah. >> as andrea pointed all indications are that susan rice will be the pick for secretary of state and all indications are that it would be a very ugly confirmation battle. is it worth it for the president to take on this fight, and at this point, does he have any choice given how vigorously he's defended her? >> officially the white house has not made a decision yet. i was told last night right at the top over there they haven't made a decision yet, but he clearly has to get some separation it seems from the fight over what happened in benghazi, the testimony she gave on "meet the press" in mid-september was and the issue of picking secretary of state. if he can separate the two issues by a couple of weeks. if he has to make the nomination right in the middle of this, we'll have an opening act to
was offering in terms of economic direction, foreign policy direction. had to reflect on the road we've just traveled in the last four years and as voters do, they spent a lot of time thinking about the future. so in the next four years who can i trust on the economy, on social issues and foreign policy. and we live in a country that is even pli divided politically and we have close elections. our victory in 2008 was a landslide. it was clear this election was going to be closer, fwiven the economy and divisions in the country. with that being said, we still won electoral college, maybe not a landslide but a clear majority. our popular vote is 3% which is a healthy margin. and i think the reason we won is people understood where we had been economically. all of you have lived through the recession. this is not something that is an academic theory. everyone painfully lived through the recession. we are beginning to recover from that. the economy has created jobs over 5 fnt 5 million jobs which our economy is far too week but the electorate said i'm beginning to feel some progress. does that m
Search Results 0 to 48 of about 49 (some duplicates have been removed)